Exploring the social image of anabolic steroids users through motivation, sportspersonship orientations and aggression

Social Perceptions of Masculinity and Sexual Esteem Are Impacted by Viagra Use, Testosterone, and Sexual Performance

Sexual behaviors play a role in the social construction of masculinity. Moreover, this stereotype has been capitalized upon by pharmaceutical companies, as well as those that sell products not approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, for purposes of marketing sexual medicines. Stereotypical notions of masculinity, however, also emphasize the importance of self-reliance, which may cause some to look unfavorably upon the use of sexual medicine. Consistent with this notion, a male target was viewed as more masculine when his female partner consistently reached orgasm, unless he had no history of erectile dysfunction (ED), but was taking Viagra anyway (Experiment 1; N = 522). In addition, when his partner consistently reached orgasm, ratings of his sexual esteem were also lower if he used Viagra than if he did not, but only if he had no history of ED. In Experiment 2 (N = 711), although there was no effect of a male target's use of testosterone, social perception of his masculinity and sexual esteem increased as his "natural" levels of testosterone increased. In addition, exploratory analysis revealed that if the male target had low (but not normal or high) "natural" levels of testosterone, ratings of his masculinity were higher if his female partner consistently had an orgasm, which suggests that female orgasm served to "rescue" masculinity. Because expectations about drugs drive their use, it is important to address preconceived notions about the use of sexual medicines for purposes of enhancing masculinity and sexual esteem, as the social perception of their use is much more complex.

Context matters: athletes' perception of dopers' values, actions and vulnerabilities

Background

Although athletes seem to hold uniform views towards non-dopers, their perception of dopers is more nuanced, reflecting positive and negative attributes. Research also indicates that rarely a single factor can explain doping, but a host of reasons that intertwine. A holistic understanding of how values play a role in decisions in anti-doping and the elements that influence athletes' doping vulnerability is timely and warranted.

Methods

We recruited elite athletes from 13 countries representing 27 sports at a national or international level (N = 60) to participate as part of a larger research project. Data were collected via focus group interviews focusing on values, value priorities and perceptions about the role of values in doping as a phenomenon and in dopers' actions. Data were analysed using iterative thematic analysis.

Results

Three themes were identified: (1) athletes' personal stance on doping, (2) dopers in the eyes of the anti-doping-compliant athletes, and (3) doping vulnerability is a balance. Athletes in this study strongly opposed doping but showed empathy and understanding toward athletes who doped under certain circumstances. Furthermore, athletes believed that "clean" and "doping" athletes are not always distinguished by the values they hold, leading to the realisation that all athletes can be vulnerable to doping at some point. This vulnerability is a balance between risks and protective factors in a complex interaction between environmental, personal, and situational influences. Each element (e.g., values, environment) can be a motivator or a barrier. Consequently, doping vulnerability is highly idiosyncratic and dynamic.

Conclusion

If doping is not due to a lack of moral values but the consequences of combined risk factors that override the guiding function of values, then doping can happen to anyone, "good" athletes included. Developers and facilitators of anti-doping education programmes are advised to embrace this important aspect. The results also contribute to developing the doping vulnerability concept as a balance between risks and protective factors and draw attention to the clean athlete vulnerability, which is rooted in the combination of strategic performance enhancement via non-prohibited means, their exposure to anti-doping requirements and the constant high level of suspicion that surrounds them.

Don't look back in anger: A cross-sectional and dyadic examination of the Dark Triad, anger, and aggression in athletes

OBJECTIVES

The Dark Triad (psychopathy, Machiavellianism, and narcissism) has been linked to anti-social behaviour in sport, and while anti-social behaviour often involves aggression and violence, no research to date has examined the relationship between the Dark Triad and anger and aggression in athletes. The current two-sample study sought to address this gap.

DESIGN

Multi-sample cross-sectional design.

METHOD

Sample 1 included 224 athletes (MAGE = 23.85) and Sample 2 included 98 coach-athlete dyads (196 total; athlete MAGE = 18.15, coaches MAGE = 34.84). In both samples, facets of the Dark Triad were related to anger and aggression.

RESULTS

In Sample 1, regression analyses indicated that psychopathy positively predicted both anger and aggression and Machiavellianism positively predicted aggression. In Sample 2, actor-partner interdependence models indicated a combination of dyadic relationships (i.e., both actor [coach and athlete personality predicted their own anger and aggression] and partner effects [coach and athlete personality predicted the other's anger and aggression]). In this regard, actor effects were found between psychopathy and both anger and aggression and narcissism and aggression. Coach to athlete partner effects were found for narcissism and anger and Machiavellianism and aggression.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the findings provide evidence for personal and interpersonal relationships between the Dark Triad and anger and aggression and highlight the potential for the darker side of both athlete and coach personality to influence athlete emotions.

Examining a negative halo effect to anabolic steroids users through perceived achievement goals, sportspersonship orientations, and aggressive tendencies

We investigated the social image of anabolic steroids (AS) users grounding our analysis on the achievement goal theory of Nicholls. Our main goal was to explore how an athlete's acceptance of AS use would impact on the way that athlete will be perceived by others. Non-AS-using participants reacted to one of two scenarios portraying a male athlete either accepting or refusing to engage in drug use behavior. The results suggested that the acceptance of anabolic steroids yielded an unfavorable social image--perceivers inferred a predominant ego orientation to characterize the AS-user's motivation as well as weaker sportspersonship and a stronger proclivity for reactive aggression than instrumental aggression. Moreover, the analyses did not yield significant gender or interaction effects. Finally, those findings are commented in view of methodological shortcomings and of the perspectives that they may offer for future research concerning the motivational aspects of the social perceptions of drug use in sport.